Closed (won't fix)
Project:
Drupal.org security advisory coverage applications
Component:
module
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Task
Assigned:
Unassigned
Issue tags:
Reporter:
Created:
27 Jul 2015 at 13:54 UTC
Updated:
19 Dec 2015 at 23:25 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent, Most recent file
Comments
Comment #1
PA robot commentedThere are some errors reported by automated review tools, did you already check them? See http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxsmakisog2540518git
We are currently quite busy with all the project applications and we prefer projects with a review bonus. Please help reviewing and put yourself on the high priority list, then we will take a look at your project right away :-)
Also, you should get your friends, colleagues or other community members involved to review this application. Let them go through the review checklist and post a comment that sets this issue to "needs work" (they found some problems with the project) or "reviewed & tested by the community" (they found no major flaws).
I'm a robot and this is an automated message from Project Applications Scraper.
Comment #2
smakisog commentedFixed errors reported by automated review tools.
Comment #3
alons commentedAutomated Review
No errors - http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxsmakisog2540518git
Note that perfect adherence to Drupal Coding Standard is NOT a reason to block an application, except for total disregard of them. However, modules should follow them as closely as possible.
Manual Review
file ecs.install in function _ecs_fields() duplicate keys "label"
in function ecs_install() line 26 - Variable 'values' might have not been defined
in file includes/ecs.helper.inc line 207 - Variable 'nid' might have not been defined
file menu/ecs-admin-ui.inc line 26 - Typo: in word 'remore', I think 'remote' will be right
The starred items (*) are fairly big issues and warrant going back to Needs Work. Items marked with a plus sign (+) are important and should be addressed before a stable project release. The rest of the comments in the code walkthrough are recommendations.
If added, please don't remove the security tag, we keep that for statistics and to show examples of security problems.
This review uses the Project Application Review Template.
Comment #4
smakisog commentedThanks for review. Changes added.
Comment #5
smakisog commentedComment #6
smakisog commentedComment #7
smakisog commentedComment #8
smakisog commentedComment #9
smakisog commentedComment #10
smakisog commentedComment #11
smakisog commentedReview bonus condition, i hope, reached.
Comment #12
dstorozhukThis is not a full review, just some points I noticed.
Any migration module cannot cover content structure for all sites.
Consider this is a duplicate (probably need to stop at this point and suggest work with migrate_d2d developers).
Listmodule is not mandatory in the Drupal, so your module may break on installation phase iflistdisabled.You are using
list_booleanfield autocreation on the installation phase_ecs_fields().I haven't checked all the code in details, I general code looks very good.
But my point it is duplicate, hope I am wrong.
Comment #13
dstorozhukComment #14
smakisog commentedThank for review. I've took into your notices and placed them in commit.
About migrate_d2d
This is not duplicate of migrate_d2d module. We provide synchronization of two sites with minimal manual settings which not provided.
In case of d2d we theoretically need to:
- setup each content types one by one and this lead us to multiple groups which will make process of setting up of synchronization much more difficult;
- we need have DB access to both sites, which not often present;
- we need create complex rules on CRUD operation with content types;
- another necessary things;
This take a lot of time to solve simple synchronization issue.
Comment #15
klausionly the manual reviews are relevant for the review bonus program.
Comment #16
klausiReview of the 7.x-1.x branch (commit 2cad3d9):
This automated report was generated with PAReview.sh, your friendly project application review script. You can also use the online version to check your project. You have to get a review bonus to get a review from me.
manual review:
Removing review bonus tag, you can add it again if you have done another 3 reviews of other projects.
Comment #17
smakisog commentedComment #18
smakisog commentedThanks, klausi.
I've fixed PAReview notices and edit both issue and module description by adding similar modules list.
Comment #19
smakisog commentedComment #20
manjit.singh@smakisog: Thanks for the contributions !! I guess there is so many
'access callback' => TRUE,for['ecs/*']menu items in module file. And these are accessible to anonymous user as well.Another scenario, i have restrict the content (article) for anonymous user but still
ecs/content_mappingis showing me content as an array. Please check the best way of use Access Arguments and hook_menuAlso check screenshot for the content issue.
Comment #21
smakisog commented@Manjit:Thanks for your review and notices.
I've added access callback function which control access to menu.
Also i slightly improve incoming packet fetching.
Comment #22
smakisog commentedComment #23
smakisog commentedComment #24
klausimanual review:
So quite a few security vulnerabilities left.
Comment #25
smakisog commented@klausi: Thanks for such deep review.
I am fix and rewrite code regarding your notices. Also security part of admin page, id aliases and batch process was improvement.
Comment #26
klausimanual review:
Comment #27
smakisog commentedThanks, klaus.
I've created an issue in responding module (https://www.drupal.org/node/2567731) and also wrote to current maintainer.
Comment #28
smakisog commentedHello again,
klausi, i have contacted with the maintainer of enitysync module. As you can see i am waited two week to get posibility to get ownership. Answer was, as you see, almost two weeks from request. But for now, after the answer, already passed almost two weeks without any movements.
What shall i do in that situation?
Comment #29
PA robot commentedClosing due to lack of activity. If you are still working on this application, you should fix all known problems and then set the status to "Needs review". (See also the project application workflow).
I'm a robot and this is an automated message from Project Applications Scraper.